1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s husband C is a person who operates E in Changwon-si D, and the Defendant is a liquor company that supplied alcoholic beverages to E.

B. On August 23, 2013, upon C’s request, the Defendant lent KRW 30 million to C. At the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant drafted two copies of the notarial deed as follows.

(1) No. 717 of the deed 2013, dated August 23, 2013: Loans 10 million won: creditors, the defendant, the debtor, the debtor C, the plaintiff who is a joint and several surety (the maximum amount of KRW 13 million), the payment deadline in installments shall be 100,000 won on the 25th day of each month from September 2013 to June 2014, and the delay damages shall be 20% (hereinafter “instant authentic deed”). (2) A loan No. 719 of the deed 2013, dated August 23, 2013: loans 20 million won: the creditor, the debtor, the debtor, the debtor, G (the maximum amount of guaranteed debt), the debtor, the debtor, the plaintiff who is a joint and several surety (the maximum amount of KRW 13 million), the repayment deadline shall be 200,000 won on the 25th day of each month from September 2013 to 205.

C transferred KRW 8 million in total to the H’s account, the wife of the Defendant representative director, on October 30, 2013; November 29, 2013; December 28, 2013; and January 29, 2014; and January 29, 2014; and April 1, 2014; and April 30, 2014; and each one million won on July 4, 2017.

The defendant stated that the above remittance amount was collected by adding KRW 363,400 on June 3, 2014, and the repayment of the debt under other notarial deeds was made by the director of the customer bank within the defendant company (at present, KRW 11,636,600 in the balance of loans under other notarial deeds), and that the plaintiff's joint and several liability obligations under the notarial deed of this case were not fully repaid (at present, KRW 10 million in the balance of loans under the notarial deed of this case). [Grounds for recognition] The facts that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that C, the primary debtor, repaid KRW 8 million with respect to the instant debt under the notarial deed, and the remainder of KRW 2 million was exempted.